Applying for Listed Building Consent
Jonathan Taylor

Listed timber-framed buildings in Marlborough, a medieval market town in Wiltshire.

The needs of the owner of an historic building do not always coincide with conservation requirements. The accommodation may not suit modern standards of living or working, and alterations required to adapt historic fabric can lead to major conflicts with the conservation authorities. If an application for listed building consent or conservation area consent is well managed by representatives of the applicant and the council, the scheme can be carefully negotiated through the planning process, finding solutions which suit both the existing building and the needs of the owner. But, all too often, negotiations are badly handled by one or both parties; the process gets bogged down in intransigence, and opportunities are missed. Success depends on good communication and a willingness to understand the needs of the other party.

A very small proportion of historic buildings are so unique that they have to be preserved as they stand, unaltered. However, for the vast majority of historic buildings, whether listed or in a conservation area, there is scope for justifiable alterations to varying degrees, from the skilful adaptation of existing components to the wholesale replacement of recent additions and inappropriate alterations.

THE CRITERIA AFFECTING ALTERATIONS

Viability
Where a building is not viable in its current use, the conservation authorities not only accept the need to find a new use, they may actively seek it, particularly if conversion is seen as the only alternative to the deterioration, decay and, ultimately, the loss of the building. Alterations to suit the new use are often inevitable. Warehouse conversions for residential use, for example, are now common and some of them are quite spectacular, combining modern style with historic material and interesting spaces. Yet, almost inevitably, such conversions entail a degree of alteration both to the historic fabric and their character that would not be acceptable in a building that was viable in its current use, or if an alternative use could be found that was viable and less harmful.

However, viability issues are not always black and white, and in some cases it can be difficult for the planning and conservation officers of the local authority assessing a scheme to distinguish between those alterations which are essential to the viability of a building, and those that are simply making a scheme more profitable. Where the cost of sympathetic repairs exceed the value of the building, there may be a variety of less suitable alternatives for making the scheme viable, such as increasing its accommodation, or rebuilding part of the structure. Planning officers and the developers need to work together to find the best solution, but all too often an attitude of distrust develops, where the developer feels that the planners' aims are unrealistic, and the planning officers feel that the developer is only concerned by his or her profit margin. Good communication and openness are essential on both sides from the start if an impasse is to be avoided.

Listed timber-framed buildings in Shrewsbury. Inappropriate alterations such as poor shopfronts and signs erode the character of historic buildings in conservation areas.

Historic and architectural importance
The Buildings are listed for their 'special architectural or historic interest'. The greater the degree of importance, the lesser the likelihood of any alterations being acceptable, and the grade at which a building is listed is a 'material consideration for the exercise of listed building control' (PPG15). But conversely, some elements of the building may be considered to be of lesser historic importance, depending on the nature of its history and may be more suitable for alteration, and the removal of later alterations which conflict with the character of the historic building can provide opportunities for development.

Often a building is the product of more than one period, and alterations made at one time are often described as being part of the history of the building. This may, for example, justify the retention of a fine Victorian ceiling which is hiding the original Georgian ceiling, although it is unlikely to be used to justify the retention of a 1960s suspended ceiling, even though it is just as incongruous historically. Historic importance, it would seem, is in the eye of the beholder.

When making any repair or alteration, the historic importance of every component needs to be considered, from the overall design of the building and its setting, down to the smallest unit. Details such as the marks on a stone or on a rough-hewn piece of timber which show how it was made, and imperfections such as patina, worn surfaces and the slightly distorted image presented by old glass, represent the visible evidence of age and historic interest, without which the historic components of a building may look modern or faked.

Viability
Where the integrity of the structure is under threat, alterations are often required to sort out defects. Alterations are generally assessed by the following criteria:

Minimum intervention Are the works really necessary? Can the repair be achieved in a manner which will affect less of the original and historic fabric? Will the work cause further problems in the future which are liable to require further intervention?
Reversibility Can any new material or repairs be removed in the future, and the fabric returned to its present state, should the new work have failed or another solution is required?
Sympathetic repairs to restore structural integrity are unlikely to be controversial, provided that they really are necessary and the work accords with these principles as closely as possible. However, repairs are often carried out unnecessarily, often where deterioration has occurred in the past but has ceased to be a problem. Walls distorted by settlement, for example, may seem alarming, but often the structure is quite stable, and even some ongoing movement may be acceptable in certain circumstances. Likewise, symptoms of timber decay may well indicate a problem which is now inactive. In such cases, unnecessary work can be avoided simply by employing professional consultants (architects, surveyors, structural engineers or heritage consultants) who specialise in this field. Most professional consultants have not had the training required to work in this field and have limited experience of the problems which can arise.

ThListed warehouses and industrial buildings in the regenerated Castlefield area of Manchester after decades of dereliction.

Design quality
Usually the quality of the proposal is one of several contributory factors which justifies the approval of an application for listed building consent, and only in very exceptional cases is the quality of a new design alone considered to be sufficiently superior to that of the original listed building or component of a listed building to justify its alteration or replacement. More usually it is the lack of quality which justifies a refusal.

There is a tendency to design all new work to match the existing, and often this is the best solution if the character of the original architecture is to be retained. However, this does not mean creating a fake. Government guidance given in PPG15 states that, in general, the wholesale reinstatement of missing components should be avoided, except where 'a building has largely retained the integrity of its design'. In these cases 'the reinstatement of lost or destroyed elements of that design could be considered', but it advises against 'the speculative restoration of missing components'.

In some cases the alterations required will have a considerable impact on the character of the building however they are designed. A low key approach will help to retain the emphasis on the original architecture, but often the combination of crisp, modern design and historic original components creates the most interesting scheme, and may actually be preferred by the planning officers. However, the success of a creative approach depends on the skill of the designer, and if the planning system appears to favour traditional, low key solutions, it is because not all designers have the creativity required to carry off a more imaginative solution. It is also much easier for the planning officers to help achieve a quiet, sympathetic solution than a dynamically creative one.

Yew trees in Tisbury Churchyard, which were deliberately and illegally poisoned, no doubt because they restricted the view from the new flats behind. Any tree over three inches in diameter within a conservation area is protected by law.

Accessibility
Access for the disabled has become a political priority. Where listed buildings are open to the public for access to 'goods, facilities and services', the introduction of physical adjustments will be necessary under the Disability Discrimination Act wherever the improvements can be achieved without conflicting with the character of the listed building. In practice, local authorities, English Heritage, Historic Scotland and Cadw will often accept access improvements even where there is some conflict, if the need justifies it.

Planning negotiation
Discussions with the planning officers are best commenced before an application is made. However, in a period of great activity in the building sector, pre-application meetings are often only possible for the very largest schemes and the most important buildings. So it is important to consider the policies of the council carefully in advance, and to carry out as much research as possible into the type of scheme which is likely to be accepted. Nevertheless, the requirements of the council may not become clear until after the application has been made and a conservation officer has had a chance to visit the building. Few listed building consent applications go through without some modification, so the first meeting with the planners is vitally important. It should establish the historic and architectural importance of the building, the aims of the project, the need for any alterations and repairs, and how they will be achieved. Be prepared to back up any controversial issues with surveys and, where viability issues are concerned, costings. Above all, bear in mind the need for transparency and trust.